Since most people don't know the basics about brazil or it's forests and patriotic brazilians on the internet are as abundant as they are likely to troll and HUEHUEHUE, flamewars will definitely insue.

you have been playing way too much civilization

so it's like you stole an imported car (american or japanese or whatever) just until they started producing it over in NZ, when you dumped the old car and bought a new one. another bad thing abouy torrents is that you were uploading as well as downloading, so even if you are so noble as to erase it, you wouldn't think its fare to charge you with copyright inf. when the pirate cd producers got a copy that came, a little bit maybe, by your means.

Yeah, let's just disregard anything said by those damn scientists. bah. Both my parents are university teachers, with good resumes. The thing they hate the most is when their students say things like: "I reckon yadda yadda yadda..." or "I think yadda yadda yadda", pulling their own concepts with no research or anything like it. I know it seems common sense, but maybe you guys shouldn't be so quick in your assumptions - always remember: in a perfect world, a research only comes available to the public when it's been reviewed by peers. So it's conclusions are far more auspicious than yours, even if you common sense tells otherwise. I'm not saying someone should be naive and trust anything they read, but in order to say out loud your own conclusion on a topic, at least do some research, get an statistical proof of concept and publish it. Only then you'll have a fair ground of discussion.

people who can't be attended at a local hospital because you are being treated for being to damn stupid to wear a seatbelt. It's the same with rollercoasters and stuff: the theme parks require you to wear the belts and other safety measures simply because hurting you would cause them financial losses. financial losses = bankrupcy or financial difficulties = people unemployed. but that's beside the point: you think the only way of harming others is by causing them physical damage? if my taxes are being spent on scrapping rednecks of the road, I'd like the government to do something about it. So, regardless of what you may think, yes, the government must protect people from their own stupidity for the sake of others.

when it costs money to the state to clean up for the mess you made (ambulance, ER, etc.). Maybe you have money to pay for your expenses, but if you don't 911 will still be called and whatever is left of you will still get the care you need so you can remain as a burden to the state. Oh but I pay may taxes - maybe the taxes could go down if the state didn't have to put so many people working so that dumbasses like you could get launched of their cars and still sue the authorities for an ambulance that never came.

In Brazil, another western (but underdeveloped) democracy, we barely even have religious classes, only philosophy, and the religious classes are only those ministered by the church in dominical schools.

I reckon the main problem is that americans love the word 'scientist'. It's has a catchy sound and makes us think about reclusive people dressed in white overalls with deep glasses and making experiments with colorful liquids that might explode. Since people don't quite understand what these 'scientists' do, or how they become scientists, they tend to treat science with skepticism. That old eureka! image of someone coming up with a theory right out of the bat is what people think went down when charles darwin came up with his 'ideas'.

Here (again in Brazil) the good schools don't have a science class for anyone past the age 10. Right from the early days we already separate what is biology, what is chemistry, physics and so on. So the 'scientist' is not a nutjob that pulls out ideas out of his ass, he's simply an chemistry, biology, etc. teacher whose job is to research and than write the books that children and adults use to study. That's how you make people to trust science despite religion telling you the opposite: get them early like religion does. Every time I read 'scientists claim that...' or 'sc

Science is a word that should be forbidden. It oversimplifies everything that gathered, empirically tested and accepted knowledge is. Since people don't quite understand what 'science' is all about, they think it's something to 'believe' or 'have faith' in. I grew up to be a skeptical and rational man, and I have my chemestry, biology and physics teachers to thank.

stop adding douches who post kids photos then.

people who have big debts in their bank accounts would rather receive in paper checks since they can be cashed out. in brazil we have a saying for those situations: i owe it, won't deny it but pay when i can (and can in this saying means whenever I damn want). sure, bad credit and no loans for you, but you can still put food on the table and sustain your family.

I call bullshit on that research. Maybe the subjects for it were the hipsters that don't really have anything interesting to read but love to sit on the grass in popular parks to show-off their pseudo-intellectuality with an e-reader on their hands.

a car used to require loads of maintenance; they were real difficult to drive and they had horrible safety measures. we didn't change the concept, we improved it. same goes for helicopters. Alas, the real question is: concerning safety, legislation, price, etc, how does one differ helicopters from "flying cars" in the means of purpose?

what's the difference, in purpose or availability, from the so-called flying car and an actual helicopter? Fuel is carbon based, as small as 4 passengers models available, reliable and fast. Just because they don't look like cars they won't fit the utopia of flying cars?

The concerns about safety, procedure of taking off and landing and range, payload and necessity of documentation are the same as the requirements for a flying car would be.

this poll is absurd assuming that a flying transport has to look like a car.

that all happened in the last 100 years or so (the inclusion of long-chain hydrocarbons in industrial processes), depending on the raw material. What do you think will come in the next 100 years? As we once stopped using steam and furnaces for every single piece of machinery, so we will stop using petroleum for every single industrial process. Don't underestimate the economy's ability to change and reinvent itself only because you can't see 20 years from now.

and even then they had problems with piracy... the east india trade co was well known for hunting down those damn pirates!

mod parent up. Americans did exacly the dame thing 2 centuries ago. remember the industrial revolution didn't in america. All the designs were stolen. germans, dutch, italians and brits should have had the same reaction americans now do towards japanese, chinese and koreans. and don't mind the indians and brazilians coming right behind.